This is a well structured and fluently written essay with a clear argument, well done.

The examples are

appropriate and the evidence and quotations you have chosen highlight your argument well. Excellent
set of readings.
You could do more to say specifically why Bosnia, Rwanda and Armenia are cases of genocide at the
start of the essay ? perhaps compare them against the UN Convention. You say they are all cases of
genocide, but are they all exactly the same? Are there any differences between them that are of
importance when considering outsiders' failure to prevent/end them?
To push your argument further, think about the reasons why major international actors fail the victims
of genocide: you give a few reasons, such as political and economic interests, reputation, the desire to
avoid costly and indeterminate conflicts, UN bureaucratic inertia and so on. Could you systematise
these at all? Are the reasons the same in each case, such that you can make a general claim, or does
it vary case by case?
In the bibliography, make sure you give the publisher of books.

Dear Student,

You have a clever argument. Importantly, you build in very plausible objections to your
claims and then seek to respond to those objections. Your three points of criticism build
very well on each other, and you end with a satisfying resolution. As noted throughout,
the biggest weakness of the paper is the occasional lack of clarity. I suspect that a lot of
this has to do with the difficulties of writing in a second language. I encourage you to
avail yourself of the writing center. Also, as noted, your opening needs to be more clear.
Don’t worry about giving away your main point upfront – in philosophy that’s a good
thing. Finally, it’s significant that you overlook Sen’s comments on comparing in the
absence of an ideal standard.

Dear student

I’m impressed with your ability to write concisely. Not only did you fulfill the assignment, you
also wrote a long-ish intro and answered questions that went beyond the prompt. Doing so
within the word limit and doing it well deserves recognition. One result is that outside of the
opening paragraph the entire essay is focused exclusively on the arguments –there’s no excess
fat in this essay. Given the nature of the assignment, that’s great. As noted throughout, however,
some of your specific arguments need developed –your paper would’ve been better served had
you eliminated one of the arguments in order to better develop the others along the lines
mentioned in my comments above. Overall, it’s clear that you understand each of the
philosophers you address and you present interesting ideas.

Dear Student

As noted above, you do well “synthesizing”several insights from multiple studies as you
make different points, rather than flatly summarizing one study at a time. I’ve tried to
make clear in my comments the things that I think you can do to strengthen this paper
and your writing in general. Specifically, I want to emphasize the following:
1. Argument. This is critical. Your paper is almost exclusively a report of various points
of consensus among the authors you cite. This does not meet the specifications of the
assignment. What’s needed is to utilize this ability –the ability to extract important
and overlapping ideas from the literature –in the service of your own independent
argument. A clear and specific thesis sentence stated up top will help you to organize
and tie together the various parts of your paper. The conclusion section should also
help to do the same thing. Your conclusion here is a bookend, bringing up the same
(or at least a similar) point as the one you began with concerning the different kinds
of attraction that exist. More than just a bookend, however, you want your
conclusion to be in the service of your argument. It should both summarize and
highlight the most important points you’ve tried to establish in the body of your
paper and state how these points support your thesis. At each stage, however, ask
yourself –how does this support my argument? Is this fact clear to my reader?
2. Structure. Some of the different sections and points you’re making in the paper are
clearly flagged for the reader with transition words. Remember, however, that the
paper is not just a list of points. This is closely related to my comment on argument.
At any given point in the paper it should not only be clear to the reader what you’re
saying but also why you’re saying it. Transition language needs to be accompanied
by explicitly tying together or explaining the relationship between the different
sections of the paper. Doing so is an important way to highlight your overall
argument and make the paper cohere.
3. Counterargument. As discussed in the assignment, a critical part of your argument is
exploring a counterargument. Either in making specific claims to support your thesis
or after articulating your argument, consider countervailing evidence or interpretive
frameworks or objections to your reasons and conclusions. Doing so will strengthen
your case. This is not just true when attempting to make your own argument, but is
also an important element of explicating the academic dialogue for your reader. If all
of the authors you cite were locked in a room would they all agree on the question
you’re exploring? Help your reader to understand the tensions, contradictions and
questions that are left in the wake of their studies. Then argue for why –given these
tensions, contradictions and questions –your reader ought to side with your own
claims.
4. Proofreading. The host of punctuation and grammar errors, along with the
frequently awkward phrasing of the paper makes it read like a first draft. This is very
distracting and inhibits your ability to keep the attention of the reader or convince
the reader of your point.
Again, the paper shows a good grasp of some of the basic points made in the literature,
weaving together a number of overlapping ideas. I’m confident in your ability to
improve.

James